Skip to main content
Glama

AstroWay Applied readings

Ideal Partner Signs

astroway_business_ideal_partner_sign
Read-onlyIdempotent

Trine elemental partners with natural synergy.

[Group: Business Astrology] [Cost: 10 credits (Tier 1)]

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
cityNo
dateYes
nameNo
timeYes
fieldsNoCompact mode: comma-separated dotted paths to keep, relative to `data`, e.g. "planets.name,planets.longitude,houses.cusp". Omit for the whole response.
ayanamsaNoSidereal school by name. Lahiri when omitted. Equivalent to ayanamsaId; send either.
latitudeYes
timezoneNoIANA zone name such as Europe/Kyiv, or auto to look the zone up from latitude and longitude. The server takes the offset that zone kept at this local date and time, summer time included, and uses it in place of timezoneOffset. A clock time that happened twice takes the first occurrence; one skipped when clocks went forward takes the offset from before the change. Abbreviations such as EST are refused. Before 1970 the tz database is not reliable for every place, so send timezoneOffset when the local clock is known.
cosmogramNo
longitudeYes
precisionNoCompact mode: round fractional numbers to this many decimals. Longitudes carry 14 by default; 2 is finer than any chart is drawn.
ayanamsaIdNo
zodiacTypeNo
houseSystemNoP
timezoneOffsetNoHours from UTC at the given moment, not minutes. Fractional zones are hours too: 5.5 for India, 5.75 for Nepal, -3.5 for Newfoundland. Defaults to 0, meaning UTC. Ignored when timezone is sent.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idealPartnerSignsNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

C2/5.0
Behavior3/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the cost/credit tier ('10 credits (Tier 1)'), which is real behavioral context not present in annotations, but says nothing about what the operation returns or its prerequisites.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness2/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

It is short, but the brevity reflects under-specification rather than disciplined editing. The front-loaded line is vague, and the second block is service metadata rather than task-relevant content.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness2/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained, but for a 15-parameter specialized tool with only 33% schema coverage the single vague sentence is far from complete. An agent cannot confidently determine what the tool computes or how to populate its many optional parameters.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is only 33% across 15 parameters, and the description contributes zero parameter-level meaning. Parameters such as cosmogram, zodiacType, and houseSystem are undocumented in both the schema and the description, so the required compensation for the coverage gap is absent.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose2/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description offers a poetic fragment ('Trine elemental partners with natural synergy') but never states a verb or the resource being produced. It gestures at the concept of trine-element partner signs without saying it computes an ideal-partner-sign reading from a birth chart, so an agent must infer the function largely from the tool name.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines1/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

No when-to-use, prerequisites, or alternatives are given. With closely related siblings like astroway_business_team_compatibility and astroway_relational_synastry, the description provides no routing guidance for choosing this tool over them.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources